Debian TC vote on init system coupling

Posted Feb 24, 2014 10:27 UTC (Mon) by Zack (guest, #37335)
In reply to: Debian TC vote on init system coupling by vonbrand
Parent article: Debian TC vote on init system coupling

Two non-Linux kernels.

A "install once, upgrade flawlessly for the next decade" policy.

An open inclusive approach to alternatives to allow for future developments and satisfy minority operating system needs.

Little or no allowance for changes that would ease the installation of proprietary software.

Debian TC vote on init system coupling

Posted Feb 24, 2014 11:16 UTC (Mon) by vonbrand (subscriber, #4458) [Link] (3 responses)

Except for the "two non-Linux kernels" (which isn't much more than the hobby of two tiny groups), this describes most distributions. Debian isn't anything special, really.

Debian TC vote on init system coupling

Posted Feb 24, 2014 12:50 UTC (Mon) by Zack (guest, #37335) [Link] (2 responses)

> than the hobby of two tiny groups

except one if them is a officially released and supported architecture, and so far from being "barely usable" and "toy" that most people running GNU/Linux would hardly notice any difference if you secretly swapped it for GNU/kFreeBSD.

>>A "install once, upgrade flawlessly for the next decade" policy.
>>An open inclusive approach to alternatives to allow for future developments and satisfy minority operating system needs.

> this describes most distributions.

No, that's just plain nonsense.

I've witnessed no other distribution manage new release upgrades so flawlessly that a re-install was never necessary or simply easier to perform. Even if some of them have caught up regarding system wide upgrades, they do not have a track record going that far back.

As for open inclusive approach. The main architect of systemd is the record for speaking disparaging about other operating systems, other kernels, competing implementations, everything that doesn't fit with his view of how things should be done. Adopting that software is adopting those policies, which are definitely not "open" and "inclusive" by any definitions of the words.

>>Debian isn't anything special, really.

Well, it used to be. Incidentally you mention "My Fedoras" in an earlier comment; you do actually run Debian somewhere, right?

Debian TC vote on init system coupling

Posted Feb 24, 2014 13:04 UTC (Mon) by vonbrand (subscriber, #4458) [Link]

Not currently. Tried it a few times, but stable was just much too stale for my tastes; and if I want the exitement of running an experimental branch, I'd want it to have latest stuff too. Besides, some of the configuration tools just felt too weird (I'm a long-time Red Hat/Fedora user; I'm not saying they are better or worse, just different).

Debian TC vote on init system coupling

Posted Feb 24, 2014 15:32 UTC (Mon) by ewan (guest, #5533) [Link]

"As for open inclusive approach. The main architect of systemd is the record for speaking disparaging about other operating systems, other kernels, competing implementations, everything that doesn't fit with his view of how things should be done. Adopting that software is adopting those policies, which are definitely not "open" and "inclusive" by any definitions of the words."

That's rather unfair. I'd characterise his position as being more that Linux users should not be held back from making full use of the advantages that Linux offers over other kernels. If other kernels which to catch up and offer similar features, then that's fine - he just doesn't care either way.

Frankly, moving to systemd for Linux should be a good thing for the other kernels too - they either need to have their own plumbing layers that deliver the same benefits as systemd does on Linux, or equivalent kernel interfaces to those systemd uses on Linux. Either case is better than the woolly mess that everyone has at the moment.

Debian TC vote on init system coupling

Posted Feb 24, 2014 11:31 UTC (Mon) by anselm (subscriber, #2796) [Link]

An open inclusive approach to alternatives to allow for future developments and satisfy minority operating system needs.

The goals of the Debian project are set out in its Social Contract, which does not contain an explicit commitment to making Debian available on non-Linux platforms, or indeed to »satisfying minority operating system needs«. Debian, however, doesn't mind people trying unusual things if they are willing to do the work – although such people do not necessarily get to control the direction of the project as a whole.

Little or no allowance for changes that would ease the installation of proprietary software.

What changes would that be, and how has Debian resisted them in the past?

The Debian project has no problem in general with proprietary software. It even distributes certain types of »non-free« software from its own servers (and has received flak from the FSF for that in the past). This is because the Social Contract emphasises Debian's goal of offering a computing platform that serves its users' needs, not ideological purity – although Debian makes it reasonably easy to eschew proprietary software if one doesn't want it.